[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-1548?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14106955#comment-14106955
]
Guozhang Wang commented on KAFKA-1548:
--------------------------------------
Hi Gwen,
I kind of agree that for now maybe we do not need to change the name, with that
then what we should probably do is:
1. Add comments in RequestOrResponse explaining the semantics of replica id.
2. Change the toString of Request with "Follower Replica Id", "Normal Consumer"
and "Tooling Consumer" (this is for -2, the debugging consumer)
> Refactor the "replica_id" in requests
> -------------------------------------
>
> Key: KAFKA-1548
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-1548
> Project: Kafka
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Guozhang Wang
> Assignee: Gwen Shapira
> Labels: newbie
> Fix For: 0.9.0
>
>
> Today in many requests like fetch and offset we have a integer replica_id
> field, if the request is from a follower consumer it is the broker id from
> that follower replica, if it is from a regular consumer it could be one of
> the two values: "-1" for ordinary consumer, or "-2" for debugging consumer.
> Hence this replica_id field is also used in two folds:
> 1) Logging for trouble shooting in request logs, which can be helpful only
> when this is from a follower replica,
> 2) Deciding if it is from the consumer or a replica to logically handle the
> request in different ways. For this purpose we do not really care about the
> actually id value.
> We probably would like to do the following improvements:
> 1) Rename "replica_id" to sth. less confusing?
> 2) Change the request.toString() function based on the replica_id, whether it
> is a positive integer (meaning from a broker replica fetcher) or -1/-2
> (meaning from a regular consumer).
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
